JUDGMENT :

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction to re-engage him through Parent Teacher Association (for short ‘PTA’) with benefit of Grant in Aid Rules (for short ‘GIA Rules’) as Lecturer/PGT Commerce in Government Senior Secondary School, Sulah after quashing the order dated 23.9.2015 (Annexure P-13), whereby the case of the petitioner for his re-engagement has been rejected by Director Higher Education.

2. Undisputed and admitted facts in present case are as under:-

(A) Government of Himachal Pradesh has framed and implemented Grant-in-Aid Rules w.e.f. 29.6.2006, dealing with appointment of Teachers by Parents Teacher Associations, referred as PTA Teachers and providing Grant-in-Aid (GIA) to such appointees subject to certain conditions contained in “GIA Rules”.

(B) In the year 2006 there was one post of Lecturer/PGT Commerce in Government Senior Secondary School Sullah, District Kangra, which was occupied by contract/regular teacher. The said post was created on 5th May, 1999. Keeping in view necessity, for workload on teachers based on strength of students, PTA of the aforesaid school had engaged petitioner as PTA Lecturer/PGT Commerce on 31.8.2006 and the petitioner had joined as such on 1.9.2006 and since then till 28th February, 2013, when his services were terminated, he remained continuously engaged as PTA Lecturer/PGT Commerce.

(C). Second post of Lecturer Commerce in Government Senior Secondary School, Sulah was created vide Government letter No. EDN-B-Kha(1)-1/2007-L dated 15.9.2007. According to respondents, creation and availability of this second post of PGT/Lecturer Commerce was endorsed to the field offices on 24.5.2008 by the Deputy Director Higher Education, Kangra. Prior to that respondents-State had stopped appointments of PTA basis vide instructions dated 3.1.2008.

(D). During pendency of petition, in response to the queries raised, respondents-State has placed on record instructions dated 1.9.2021 and 17.9.2021, received from Director Higher Education. In instructions dated 17.9.2021, it has been informed that second post of Lecturer Commerce remained vacant w.e.f. 2007 to 2013 and services of petitioner were terminated by the PTA concerned, now renamed as School Management Committee (in shot ‘SMC’), of Government Senior Secondary School, Sulah vide resolution dated 24.1.2013 and at present both posts of PGT Commerce are occupied by regular incumbents Nimisha and Anil Kumar w.e.f. 21.2.2014 and 27.6.2013 respectively.

(E). Vide communication dated 19.2.2013 respondents-State had directed all PTAs to re-engage PTA teachers under GIA Rules, 2006, whose services were disengaged due to new appointment or by way of transfer, if they are found eligible by the Committee constituted by the Government. Later on, vide communication dated 31.8.2013, re-engagement of PTA teachers was re-iterated. Later on, vide communication dated 22.5.2014, issued from the office of Principal Secretary (Higher Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to the Directors of Higher Education as well as Elementary Education, it was communicated that Government had decided to re-engaged all PTA teachers who were earlier engaged before 31.12.2007 and whose services were discontinued due to the reason other than Inquiry Committee, if they were otherwise eligible as per R&P Rules and GIA would be released in their favour. In this communication, both Directors were requested to take further necessary action in the matter under intimation to the Department.

(F). Against his termination, petitioner had approached this High Court for his re-engagement by filing CWP No. 3382 of 2013, titled as Raj Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, which was decided on 29.6.2015, directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner as per notification No. EDN-H(19)B(1)-1/2012-PTA-GEN dated 31.8.2013 within a period of four weeks.

(G). In pursuance to aforesaid direction, passed in CWP No. 3382 of 2013, Director Higher Education, vide o